Management Techniques

1684 Words7 Pages
A review of current managerial techniques and adaptations reveals that little is known in regards to management variance within small to large organizations (Moates & Kulonda, 2000). In order to critically evaluate if ‘Managerial jobs are the same in both large and small organizations’, a comparison of Fayol’s fourteen principles of management (Cole, 1984, p. 13-14) is carried out between the supervisors and middle management of small and large organizations, classified as having under 50 employees, or over, respectively. As will be shown, managerial jobs differ with the size of an organization and whilst acting in a similar capacity, the roles are contrasting when complying with the principles of management.

Fayol’s fourteen principles have been accepted as the foundation of this evaluation due to their past and present ability to be utilized as a proforma for the evolution of modern management styles, including but not limited to the systems and contingency theories which have evolved around, and include segments of, the classical management theorists’ work. And is indeed the ‘first complete and comprehensive theory of management which could be applied to all endeavors’ (George, 1972, p. 114).

The division of work amongst employers, and undeniably managers themselves varies on a sliding scale with the size of an organization. For example, a company with a hierarchical organizational structure is likely to have implemented a diverse and well defined work program, thus decreasing the span of attention, or any undue effort upon any individual or work group (Cole, 1984, p. 13-14), and also limiting the need for input from management, as the guidelines have evidently been previously identified. Managers of smaller organizations tend to use their power of authority in a general sense, to delegate tasks to individual workers as they come to hand. Delegation taking place in an ad-hoc manner, places unnecessary constraints on managers, their authority, and time.

Authority within a large multi-level management structure, will be challenged on a much more regular basis, and to a greater extent than that with a flattened management structure. Whilst, smaller companies may have highly diversified daily tasks for managers and supervisors, one knows his or her place, and respects his/her place in the overall picture. However, when faced with a cumbersome configuration with up to 30 levels of management and bureaucracy, ‘power struggles’ often occur, causing a fall in productivity, clarity and motivation, not only on a personal level for the manager, but also his/her subordinates (Parker & Ritson, 2005).
Open Document